Intradermal running suture versus 3M™ Vetbond™ tissue adhesive for wound closure in rodents: a biomechanical and histological study.

BACKGROUND

Although tissue adhesives and traditional sutures were compared in numerous studies during the early stages of healing, it has to be clarified, from the histological and biomechanical point of view, how the differences develop during the later phases.

METHODS

Twenty-four male Sprague-Dawley rats were used and divided into 2 groups: the IRS (intradermal running suture) and G (glue) groups. Two parallel full-thickness skin incisions were made on the back of each rat. Wounds in the IRS group were closed by an IRS, whereas wounds in the G group were closed using tissue adhesive (n-butylcyanoacrylate). Rats were sacrificed 7 and 22 days after surgery.

RESULTS

Similar wound tensile strengths of glued and sutured wounds were measured on days 7 (IRS = 10.3 ± 1.7 g/mm(2) vs. G = 12.9 ± 4.0 g/mm(2), p = 0.9612) and 22 (IRS = 95.6 ± 15.7 g/mm(2) vs. G = 85.6 ± 16.4 g/mm(2), p = 0.2502) after surgery. Histology revealed a significantly increased amount of granulation tissue formation in glued wounds on day 7. The difference in granulation tissue formation was reduced until day 22.

CONCLUSIONS

Tissue adhesive based on n-butylcyanoacrylate presents a fair alternative to traditional suture wound closure techniques.